Pew Research has pulled together some of the latest data on how Americans celebrate (or don't) Christmas. Follow the link below for the whole story ...

Wherever Americans stand on holiday-time debates about Starbucks cups, zombie nativity scenes and billboards encouraging people to skip church, it would be hard to disagree that Christmas is still a big part of many people’s lives this time of year.Just in time for the holidays, here are five facts about Christmas in America and how people celebrate:1 About nine-in-ten Americans (92%) and nearly all Christians (96%) say they celebrate Christmas, according to a 2013 Pew Research Center survey. This is no surprise, but what might be more unexpected is that abig majority (81%) of non-Christians in the U.S.

Here are some of the study's key findings:Concerns Over Religious Freedom Have Grown Across the Board Concern about religious freedom in the U.S. has grown among every segment since the 2012 study. The growth from one-third of the general population (33%) expressing concern over religious freedom in 2012 to the more than four in 10 adults today (41%) is mirrored among the generations as well. Among Millennials, there’s been a nine percentage point increase in those who say that religious freedom is worse today than it was 10 years ago (25% to 34%); the increase is even more marked among Gen-Xers (29% to 42%) and Boomers (38% to 46%).As might be expected, religious Americans are more likely to express anxiety over the state of religious freedom in the United States than other segments. More than three-quarters (77%) of those identified as evangelicals (see definitions below) say religious liberty is worse off today than 10 years ago, compared to six in 10 (60%) in 2012. This 2015 figure is the highest among all segments by 18 percentage points.Evangelicals are also the group with the highest amount of concern for religious freedoms becoming more restricted in the next five years at seven in 10 (68%). These high numbers are a theme across the study, as evangelicals consistently rank the highest on almost every response.

In addition to evangelicals, Barna studies a broader group of Christians they identified as practicing Christians (definitions below). Even among this broader audience, more practicing Christians in 2015 than in 2012 say religious freedoms have grown worse in the past 10 years (up from 44% in 2012 to 52% today). Additionally, practicing Christians have grown more concerned since 2012 about the future of religious freedom—nearly half of them today say they are very concerned about religious freedoms becoming more restricted in the next five years (48%, up from 42% in 2012).There is also growing concern about religious freedom among Americans of other faiths—nearly one-third today (32%) say that religious freedom has grown worse, up from just one in five (19%) in 2012; and nearly one-quarter (23%) believe that religious freedom will grow worse in the next five years (up from 15% in 2012). Even among atheists, agnostics and the religiously unaffiliated, there is an upsurge in those who believe religious freedom has grown worse in the past 10 years (23% in 2012 to 32% in 2015).Americans Remain Divided About the Causes and Future of Religious FreedomAlthough there continues to be widespread agreement on the definition of religious freedom, with nine out of 10 adults agreeing with the statement: “True religious freedom means all citizens must have freedom of conscience,” (90% in 2012 and 87% in 2015), there remains significant division among Americans on both the cause of religious freedom woes and the path forward.Though around half of the general population (down from 57% in 2012 to 51% in 2015) agree that “religious freedom has become more restricted in the U.S. because some groups have actively tried to move society away from traditional Christian values,” there remains significant disagreement about whether the “gay and lesbian community is the most active group trying to remove Christian values from the country.” Among the general population in 2015, only 30 percent agree, and among those who have no faith, the figure is a low 13 percent. But half of all practicing Christians (49%), and 68 percent of evangelicals say otherwise. These numbers have remained somewhat consistent between 2012 and 2015.In addition, although almost three-quarters of Americans (72%) believe that “no one set of values should dominate the country,” the deep divisions between Christian groups and others are stark. For example, only a quarter of evangelicals (25%) agree that no one set of values should dominate the country but that figure is almost nine in 10 among those who claim no faith (89%).The same division is true when asked whether “traditional Judeo-Christian values should be given preference in the U.S.” A quarter of the general population agrees with this statement, but the difference between them and practicing Christians is significant. For example, only one in five Millennials (21%) agree with prioritizing Judeo-Christian values, but this number almost triples among practicing Christian Millennials (55% of whom agree with the statement). This trend continues with Gen-Xers (26% among the general population compared to 51% of Gen-X practicing Christians), and Boomers (29% compared to 46%).

Younger Generations Are Growing Concerned About Religious FreedomsPerhaps the biggest story to emerge from the research is the growth of concern over religious freedom among the younger generations. Millennial and Gen-X practicing Christians are the two generational segments showing the largest jump since 2012. Three years ago, one-third of Millennial practicing Christians (32%) and four in 10 Gen-X (40%) practicing Christians said religious freedom had worsened. Today, 55 percent of practicing Christian Millennials—a jump of more than 20 percentage points from 2012—and six in 10 practicing Christian Gen-Xers (59%) say so.

Millennial practicing Christians also express the highest level of concern about the future of religious freedom. More than half say they are concerned about it (56%), compared to just one in five in 2012 (19%). This is a significant increase in just a few years, particularly considering the fact that in 2012, the youngest generation of practicing Christians was far less concerned than older generations about religious liberty. This is no longer the case. Among practicing Christian Boomers, the percentage concerned about the future of religious freedom has remained the same since 2012 (48%).

* About the ResearchThe 2015 research was part of an OmniPoll(SM) survey conducted online with a representative sample of 1,000 U.S. adults 18 and older between August 7 and September 6, 2015. The research also included parallel testing using telephone surveys, including interviews conducted among respondents using cell phones, to help ensure the representativeness of the online sample. Telephone interviews were conducted from September 3 through September 6, 2015 and included 200 interviews with U.S. adults, ages 18 plus. The sampling error associated with the combined sample of 1,200 interviews is plus or minus 2.7 percentage points, at the 95% confidence level.

The 2012 research was part of an OmniPoll(SM) survey that included 1,008 telephone interviews conducted among a representative sample of adults over the age of 18 in each of the 50 United States. The sampling error for OmniPoll(SM) is plus or minus three percentage points, at the 95% confidence level. The interviews included 300 interviews conducted by cell phone, to help ensure representativeness of cell-only households.

The 2015 research was jointly commissioned by Barna Group and the Alliance Defending Freedom, based in Scottsdale, Arizona.

The 2012 research was jointly commissioned by Barna Group and Clapham Group, based in Washington, D.C.

Based upon U.S. Census data sources, regional and ethnic quotas were designed to ensure that the final group of adults interviewed reflected the distribution of adults nationwide and adequately represented the three primary ethnic groups within the U.S. (those groups which comprise at least 10% of the population: white, black and Hispanic).

“Practicing Christians” are self-identified Christians who have attended a church service in the past month and say their religious faith is very important in their life.

“Evangelicals” are self-identified Christians who have made a personal commitment to Jesus Christ that is still important in their life today and believe that when they die they will go to Heaven because they have confessed their sins and have accepted Jesus Christ as their savior. They meet seven additional belief criteria, which include saying their faith is very important in their life today; believing they have a personal responsibility to share their religious beliefs about Christ with non-Christians; believing that Satan exists; believing that eternal salvation is possible only through grace, not works; believing that Jesus Christ lived a sinless life on earth; asserting that the Bible is accurate in all that it teaches; and describing God as the all-knowing, all-powerful, perfect deity who created the universe and still rules it today. Being classified as an evangelical is not dependent upon church attendance or the denominational affiliation of the church attended. Respondents were not asked to describe themselves as “evangelical.”

“Other faith” indicates respondents who self-identify with a religion other than Christianity.

“No faith” indicates respondents who self-identify as atheist or agnostic, or who are religiously unaffiliated.

Generations: Millennials were born between 1984 and 2002; Gen-Xers between 1965 and 1983; Boomers between 1946 and 1964; and Elders in 1945 or earlier.

About Barna GroupBarna Group (which includes its research division, Barna Research Group) is a private, non-partisan, for-profit organization under the umbrella of the Issachar Companies. Located in Ventura, California, Barna Group has been conducting and analyzing primary research to understand cultural trends related to values, beliefs, attitudes and behaviors since 1984. See the Barna website barna.org.

America is famous worldwide for having established through the 1791 first amendment to its Constitution the protection of religious freedom as the "first freedom" of the new nation. The new 2015 edition of an annual survey conducted since 1997 again finds that most Americans are unable to name more than one or two of the five freedoms in the First Amendment — religion, speech, press, assembly and petition — and that one-third cannot name any of the five.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." - First Amendment

A separate survey released this month finds that nearly half of the U.S. public believes that Christians — who make up 72% of the adult U.S. population — are now facing as much discrimination as other groups in the country. Details on both surveys follow.

Click to enlarge

Do Americans Know What the First Amendment Includes?

The State of the First Amendment survey, conducted by the Newseum Institute’s First Amendment Center, tests Americans’ knowledge of their core freedoms and samples their opinions on First Amendment issues of the day.

When asked to name the five specific freedoms in the First Amendment, 57% of Americans name freedom of speech, followed by 19% who say the freedom of religion, 10% mention the freedom of the press, 10% mention the right to assemble, and 2% name the right to petition. Thirty-three percent of Americans cannot name any of the rights guaranteed by the First Amendment. Over the past year, those naming freedom of speech decreased from 68 to 57%, freedom of religion decreased from 29 to 19%, and freedom of the press declined from 14 to 10%.

Despite the lack of knowledge, in 2015, the survey found a sharp increase in the percentage of Americans who believe that the First Amendment does not go far enough in the rights it guarantees. Last year, 38% stated that the First Amendment goes too far and 57% said it does not go too far. In the current survey, only 19% say the First Amendment goes too far while 75% say it does not. The 2013 survey saw a spike in the percentage who said the First Amendment goes too far, perhaps a response to the perceived safety threat from the Boston Marathon bombings, according to the researchers. As that event is now in the more distant past, public support for the First Amendment has returned to more “normal” levels. Interestingly, the study also noted a similar dive in public opinion after the 2001 terrorist attacks.

The nationwide sampling was done by telephone between May 14 and 23, and reached 1,002 adults age 18 or older.

Click to enlarge

Americans Divided on Discrimination Against ChristiansAmericans are divided over whether Christians—who make up 72% of the adult population—are now facing as much discrimination as other groups, according to a new PRRI/RNS Religion News Survey conducted by the nonpartisan Public Religion Research Institute in partnership with Religion News Service.

Nearly half (49%) of the public say that discrimination against Christians has become as big of a problem as discrimination against other groups, while approximately as many (47%) disagree.

According to the researchers, there are notable differences among Americans by religious affiliation. Seven in ten (70%) white evangelical Protestants agree that discrimination against Christians has become as bad as discrimination against other groups. A majority (55%) of non-white Protestants also agree that discrimination against Christians has become as problematic as other types of discrimination, while white mainline Protestants (46% agree vs. 50% disagree) and Catholics (50% agree vs. 47% disagree) are divided. Nearly six in ten (59%) religiously unaffiliated Americans do not think that discrimination against Christians is comparable to that against other groups.

The PRRI/RNS Religion News Survey was was nationwide survey of 1,007 adults was conducted from June 10 to June 14, 2015. The survey measures public views on patriotism, the role that protest plays in improving our country, what makes someone “truly American,” America’s moral standing, discrimination against Christians in the U.S. and immigration. Other findings include:

More than six in ten (62 percent) Americans believe that God has granted the country a special role in human history. Additionally, 63 percent of U.S. adults say there has never been a time when they were not proud to be an American. At the same time, only 43 percent of Americans believe that the U.S. sets a good moral example for the world, while 53 percent disagree.

Most Americans do not believe the U.S. is a Christian nation. Only about one-third (35 percent) say that the U.S. is a Christian nation today, while 14 percent say that the U.S. has never been a Christian nation. Nearly half (45 percent) of the public believes that it once was a Christian nation but is not anymore. However, among Americans who believe the U.S. is no longer a Christian nation, most (61 percent) say this change is a bad thing.

Religion-related terrorists are active in more than one-in-three countries (37%) today, more than any time since 2006, according to Pew Research.

With recent "Lone Wolf" attacks in the U.S., Canada and the U.K., the terror is coming closer to home.

Common to the lone wolf scenario is a lack of social integration, including meaningful work and self-reliance. A new initiative from the Religious Freedom & Business Foundation is attempting to address this (more below).

U.S. (New York)

On Oct. 23, 2014, a self-radicalized Muslim convert, Zale H. Thompson, attacked a group of New York police officers with a hatchet, leaving one critically injured. Officials are calling it a terrorist attack. Thompson converted to Islam two years ago.

John Miller, NYPD’s deputy counterterrorism chief, told reporters that Thompson was self-directed in his actions with no affiliations to any particular group.

Thompson was unemployed, and police say his parents described him as a depressed recluse spending his time online. His recent Internet activity shows that he searched for beheadings, al Qaeda, ISIS and al Shabaab, indicating that Thompson had been planning an attack for some time.

Canada

On Oct. 22, 2014, a gunman, Michael Zehaf-Bibeau (originally Michael Joseph Hall), went on a shooting spree in Ottawa, the capital of Canada. The gunmen killed a reservist guard in front of the National War Memorial, and then proceed to the Parliament Hill. Because of the shootings, all government employees were not allowed to enter or leave their buildings throughout the interprovincial National Capital Region. Following the attack there has been some opposing reports regarding potential ISIS inspired attacks in Canada.

Preceding this shooting, Martin Couture-Rouleau – a French-Canadian who converted to Islam in 2013 – deliberately struck two Canadian soldiers with his car on Oct. 20, 2014 killing one. It is believed that Couture-Rouleau’s attack was an act of terrorism tied to Canada’s involvement in the conflict in the Middle East. Both Zehaf-Bibeau and Couture-Rouleau had documented psychological problems and were heavy drug users. And, there is some speculation that an association is being forced to push through new anti-terrorism legislation in the country.

While there is debate whether the two killers actually had ties to or were in fact motivated by terrorist leanings, there are documented cases of attempted terrorist attacks in Canada or Canadians traveling to the Middle East to join militant groups. Fen Osler Hampson, director of the global security and politics program at the Centre for International Governance Innovation, points to some recurring characteristics common to Canadian Islamists.

Compared to their counterparts in other Western countries, they are more likely to be socially marginalized, often unemployed, and act alone. Many are converts. Overall, Mr. Hampson notes however that, "In Canada, Muslims are much better integrated in society and they are much more upwardly mobile for the most part," and, "They've adopted the identity of being Canadian and being tolerant."

ISIS & the U.K.

Threat expert, Will Geddes of security and counter terrorism firm International Corporate Protection, warned that an Islamic State terror attack on soldiers in their barracks in Britain is not a matter of if, but when.

Geddes conservatively estimates three attacks, with the possibility of more. ISIS terrorist cells have reportedly been discovered, carrying out surveillance on for barracks across the country. Four British men have been charged with allegedly carrying out “hostile reconnaissance” of a police station and army barracks in west London. Mr. Geddes warns that the second threat is a high likelihood of a “loan wolf” terror attack. Unlike the large concerted attacks carried out by Al Qaeda, the threat from ISIS “is a much more low-level, under the radar, visceral type of terrorism, often involving just one or two lone wolves operating alone.”

A lone wolf may be one of two types of Islamic extremist, those who wanted to join ISS in Syria but were unable to, like Ottawa gunman Michael Zehaf-Bibeau, whose passport had been confiscated by authorities, and those who had been to the Middle East but returned to make with plans to attack in Britain. Mr. Geddes stresses that such an attack is especially dangerous due to the unpredictable nature of a person acting alone.

Self-Reliance Life Skills: An Antidote?

The Religious Freedom & Business Foundation is working with leading interfaith groups, business schools and educational institutions to develop a "Self-Reliance Curriculum."

Obtaining self-reliance life skills is a pressing need among many vulnerable communities who are susceptible to radicalization, such as Muslims in the UK. For instance, the killing on the afternoon of 22 May 2013 of a British Army soldier, Fusilier Drummer Lee Rigby in Woolwich, has reopened the debate about those who carry out acts of violence in the name of Islamist fundamentalism. Experts give their opinions on how society and the authorities should react to this incident and what could be done to combat radicalization in the UK. The debate continues as the Birmingham City Council is investigating 25 schools about claims of takeovers by Islamist extremists.

The project will make available to interfaith training teams* a curriculum of self-reliance that could be taught to members of vulnerable communities by interfaith teams beginning in the UK and then taken globally.

The curriculum would promote self-reliance as a way of life and help people make a conscious, active effort to provide for their own needs and those of their families. The program would follow the six themes for a balanced life:

education

health

employment

family home production and stewardship

family finances

spiritual strength

* Interfaith training teams will be composed of volunteers from local business as well as faith communities - having both is a unique and an essential component of the program in that involving people with real business know-how together with people of diverse faiths and beliefs helps give real alternatives to radical narratives that grow under conditions of isolation and desperation.

Less than half of all workers report that their companies have the following key policies related to religious freedom and diversity: 1) flexible work hours to permit religious observance or prayer (44%); 2) materials explaining the company's policy on religious discrimination (42%); 3) a policy to allow employees to "swap holidays" (21%); and 4) programs to teach employees about religious diversity (14%).

These findings are from a recent Tanenbaum survey, "What American Workers Really Think about Religion."The survey notes that when it comes to addressing religion in the workplace, different religious groups have different needs for accommodation. For instance, a non-Christian may care more about the right to display a religious object or the right to pray during the day, while a Christian will be more concerned about attending service on Sunday.

The survey found that the most commonly experienced or witnessed forms of religious non-accommodation are being required to work on Sabbath observances or religious holidays (24%) and attending company-sponsored events that did not include kosher, halal or vegetarian options (13%).

ABOUT THE SURVEYTanenbaum’s 2013 Survey of American Workers and Religion was conducted by Public Religion Research LLC among a random sample of 2,024 American adults (age 18 and up) who are currently employed in a part-time or full-time position and who are part of GfK’s Knowledge Panel. Interviews were conducted online in both English and Spanish between March 19 and April 1, 2013. The margin of sampling error is +/- 2.8 percentage points at the 95% level of confidence.

The survey notes that when it comes to addressing religion in the workplace, different religious groups have different needs for accommodation. For instance, a non-Christian may care more about the right to display a religious object or the right to pray during the day, while a Christian will be more concerned about attending service on Sunday. The survey found that the most commonly experienced or witnessed forms of religious non-accomadation are being required to work on Sabbath observances or religious holidays (24%) and attending company-sponsored events that did not include kosher, halal or vegetarian options (13%).

Less than half of all workers report that their companies have the following key policies related to religious diversity: 1) flexible work hours to permit religious observance or prayer (44%); 2) materials explaining the company's policy on religious discrimination (42%); 3) a policy to allow employees to "swap holidays" (21%); and 4) programs to teach employees about religious diversity (14%).

The Tanenbaum survey found that 41% of workers at companies without clear processes for handling employee complaints - including religious discrimination complaints - say they are looking for a new job where they would be happier. This is nearly twice the rate as workers who say their companies do have clear processes (22%). Likewise, 32% of workers at companies without materials explaining the company’s policy on religious discrimination report that they are looking for a new job, significantly higher than workers at companies that offer these materials (25%).

Morale is higher in companies that provide flexible hours for religious observance. In such companies, 13% say that they do not look forward to coming to work, compared with 28% of workers at companies that do not provide this flexibility (13%) - more than a twofold difference.

Tanenbaum concluded from the survey that companies gain a competitive edge by adopting proactive policies of religious accommodation. Doing so makes good business sense, in that it increases employee morale and corporate reputation with regards to employee recruitment and retention.

OTHER FINDINGS OF INTEREST:

The survey found that one-in-two U.S. workers have contact with people of different beliefs at work.

Half of non-Christians say that their employers are ignoring their religious needs.

More than half of American workers believe that there is a lot of discrimination against Muslims.

Nearly 6-in-10 atheists believe that people look down on their beliefs, as do nearly one-third of white evangelical Protestants and non-Christian religious workers.

Regardless of a company’s size, workers whose companies offer education programs about religious diversity and flexibility for religious practice report higher job satisfaction than workers in companies that do not offer such programs.

ABOUT THE SURVEYTanenbaum’s 2013 Survey of American Workers and Religion was conducted by Public Religion Research LLC among a random sample of 2,024 American adults (age 18 and up) who are currently employed in a part-time or full-time position and who are part of GfK’s Knowledge Panel. Interviews were conducted online in both English and Spanish between March 19 and April 1, 2013. The margin of sampling error is +/- 2.8 percentage points at the 95% level of confidence.

As houses of worship, sacred places and other religious properties are demolished by governments worldwide - including the Wenzhou Sanjian Church (pictured below) - authorities might want to consider the economic benefits they are loosing by such actions. For instance, a recent study of 12 houses of worship in just one city (Philadelphia) shows that they annually contribute $52 million in economic benefits and services to the city and its people. And another study shows that religious freedom contributes to economic growth and global competitiveness.

Wenzhou church demolished in a day (Kyodo, AP Images, 2014)

Indeed, while the socio-economic benefits of houses of worship have been shown, the costs of their demise, while real, go unmeasured as China - one of the world's emerging and leading economies - experiences a wave of such demolitions.

For instance, Wenzhou's Sanjian Church in China's east coast province of Zhejiang was demolished on April 29, 2014, right before the completion of its construction.

In the photo, the left side shows the start of demolition on April 28, and the right side shows the debris left the following day. Authorities cited zoning violations as the reason for the demolition, while other reports suggest that it was part of a move to limit the conspicuous visibility of places of worship. For instance, more recent reports indicate that the campaign includes removal of crosses atop another Wenzhou churches.

A recent Fact-Tank analysis by Pew Researcher Peter Henne documents that "governments damaged the property of religious groups in 34 countries around the world in 2012 ... [and although] such actions were most common in the Middle East-North Africa region (in seven of 20 countries in that region), property was damaged by governments in every region of the world."

Countries with most documented cases were Russia, China and Tajikistan, where more than 100 properties were damaged or destroyed in each during 2012.

The Study: Determining the Economic Halo Effect of Historic Congregations

A study of the economic contributions of houses of worship was carried out by Partners for Sacred Places and Prof. Ram Cnaan at the University of Pennsylvania School of Social Policy and Practice in 2010. They found that the 12 congregations examined contribute $52 million in annual economic value to the city of Philadelphia, for an average of $4.3 million per congregation.

The study assessed over 50 different factors and found that congregations serve as critical economic catalysts. The study categorized the dozens of ways congregations benefit their communities in three broad areas: 1. direct spending ($28 million); 2. the value of day care and K-12 educational programs ($8.6 million); and 3. a range of catalyzing or leveraging economic values, such as Open Space, Magnet Effect, Individual Impact, Community Development and Invisible Safety Net ($15 million).

The study observed that congregations provide clear economic value in a number of ways, including being:

important employers

purchasers of local goods and services

magnets for bringing in cash, volunteer time and other resources from outside the city

educators of pro-social values

providers of important value through the ‘invisible safety net’ of programs, counseling, and other services that help individuals and families be productive workers and citizens.

The researchers suggest that the results can help guide decisions by community and business leaders as they consider policies and investments. For instance, the tourism sector should pay attention to how places of worship and other religious properties attract travelers regionally and nationally. And those wanting to strengthen commercial activities would benefit from understanding how the people attracted to these congregations support local businesses and how congregations incubate small enterprises. Furthermore, some congregations in effect manage mid-size urban parks that contribute the the economic and environmental well-being of the city and region.

Case Study: BBC Reports on Savings Due to Church Keeping People Out of Prison

Piggot notes that it takes $35,000/year to keep a prisoner behind bars in Philadelphia, a city that spends more on its prisons than it does on its schools.

Amachi's volunteers help turn the generational cycle of crime by mentoring the children of prisoners. "I'm here on behalf of your children", he tells inmates at a prison in north Philadelphia, "because if we do nothing, 70% of them will end up in jail themselves."

* “Amachi” is a Nigerian Ibo word that means “Who knows but what God has brought us through this child.” Amachi began in Philadelphia in September 2000 with funding from Pew Charitable Trusts as a partnership between Public/Private Ventures (P/PV) and Big Brothers Big Sisters of Southeastern Pennsylvania.

Philadelphia Inquirer reporter David O'Reilly, summarized the additional social and economic benefits of places of worship with a series of questions: "What is the dollar value of a marriage saved? A suicide averted? An addiction conquered? A teenager taught right from wrong? In short: What is a church's economic worth to the community it serves?"

O'Reilly concludes quoting Robert Jaeger, executive director of the research group Partners for Sacred Places, noting that the "study shows the contribution of religious congregations to be 20 to 30 times bigger than we knew. ... It will give congregations dozens of new ways to articulate their value, broaden their constituencies, and survive and grow."

All this could have important and under-recognized impact on economic growth and competitiveness, according to recent studies:

Religious freedom is one of only three factors significantly associated with global economic growth, according to a new study by researchers at Georgetown University's Religious Freedom Project and Brigham Young University. The study looked at GDP growth for 173 countries in 2011 and controlled for two-dozen different financial, social, and regulatory influences.

Pope Francis and Vatican officials expressed concern over threats to religious freedom in the United States to U.S. President Barack Obama. While the pontiff and Vatican officials may have had in mind the contraception mandate in Obama's health care plan, broader threats to religious freedom in the United States appear to be growing.

This concern is of particular importance given the connection between religious freedom and positive economic and social outcomes shown in recent Weekly Number analyses. This connection was also discussed last week at Georgetown University's Religious Freedom Project symposium, Everybody's Business: The legal, economic, and political implications of religious freedom.

The United States now has a substantially higher level of government restrictions on religion than the world. Indeed, according to a recent Pew Research study, the U.S. level of government restrictions (3.7 on a 10-point scale) is 54% higher than the world median (2.4) in 2012, the latest year for which data are available.

While restrictions on religion have been rising globally, just six years earlier, the U.S. was lower than the global median (1.6 vs. 1.8).

Overall, while the U.S. score of 3.7 is substantially higher than the global median, the Pew study characterizes U.S. restrictions as "moderate." Indeed, the U.S, score is much lower when compared with governments with very high restrictions on religious freedom such as Egypt (8.8), China (8.6), Iran (8.6), Saudi Arabia (8.6), Indonesia (8.3) and the Maldives (8.1), Afghanistan (8.1), Syria (8.0), and Eritrea (7.9).

The rise in religious restrictions in the U.S. is attributable to several factors. First and foremost, there have been increased difficulties in accommodating religious groups at the local level. These include zoning laws, rulings on property rights, and acceptance of religious expression in schools, courts and other public settings. In the United States, however, there are structures in place to address grievances. For instance, if a religious community feels like it's experiencing discrimination, a complaint can be filed with the Justice Department.

Other restrictions are tied to tax advantages or funding to religious groups from the federal government, which not surprisingly come with strings attached. For example, if a religious group receives federal funding, proselytizing is restricted in any program that uses government funds. Groups receiving government money to run drug rehabilitation projects or care for the homeless are not allowed to share their religious testimony with the intent of bringing someone into their faith as part of those programs. And if a religious group has tax-exempt status - which nearly all apply for and have - it is not allowed to talk about politics from the pulpit or endorse a political candidate.

For a further discussion of rising government restrictions on religion and social hostilities involving religion in the U.S., see the 2012 Pew Research report. Also, see my TEDx Talk for an overview of global restrictions on religion.

As the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) takes up the issue of religious harassment and persecution in its 24 Sept. meeting in Warsaw, dozens are dead and scores injured as members of the Somalia-based Islamist group al-Shabaab attacked an upscale shopping mall in Kenya's capital, Nairobi.

And the following incidents occurred just in the past week:• Sectarian riots 127 km northwest of India's capital New Delhi killed at least 31 people and forced hundreds to flee from their homes in a sign of rising tension between Hindus and Muslims. Mehrana, a 6-year-old girl injured in the sectarian clashes (pictured), gets treatment at a district hospital in Muzaffarnagar.

Here are 6 findings from the Pew Research Center about harassment of religious groups as the OSCE and others grapple with this issue (see point 6 for details on Europe).

1. As the incidents from last week mentioned above show, harassment and intimidation by governments or social groups take many forms, including physical assaults, arrests and detentions, the desecration of holy sites and discrimination against religious groups in employment, education and housing. Harassment and intimidation also include such things as verbal assaults on members of one religious group by other groups or individuals.

2. Overall, across the five years of the Pew Research study, religious groups were harassed in a total of 185 countries at one time or another. Adherents of the world’s two largest religious groups, Christians and Muslims – who together comprise more than half of the global population – were harassed in the largest number of countries, 145 and 129 respectively. Jews, who comprise less than 1% of the world’s population, experienced harassment in a total of 90 countries, while members of other world faiths were harassed in a total of 75 countries.

3. Harassment or intimidation of specific religious groups occurred in 160 countries in 2011, the same number as in the year ending in mid-2010, according to the Pew Research study. In 2011, government or social harassment of Muslims was reported in 101 countries; the previous high was 96 countries in the first year of the study. Jews were harassed in 69 countries in 2011, about the same as the year before (68 countries, which was the previous high). As noted above, harassment of Christians continued to be reported in the largest number of countries (105), although this represented a decrease from the previous year (111).

4. In 2011, some religious groups were more likely to be harassed by governments, while others were more likely to be harassed by individuals or groups in society. Jews, for instance, experienced social harassment in many more countries (63) than they faced government harassment (28), according to the Pew Research study. Similarly, followers of folk and traditional faiths faced social harassment in four times the number of countries (21) as they faced government harassment (5). By contrast, members of other world faiths, such as Sikhs and Baha’is, were harassed by some level of government in about twice as many countries (39) as they were by groups or individuals in society (18).

5. Government or societal initiatives to reduce religious restrictions or hostilities were reported in 150 of 198 countries, or 76% of all the countries and territories studied. The most common types of initiatives, in descending order of prevalence, were: interfaith dialogue; efforts to combat or redress religious discrimination; educational and training initiatives; and land- or property-related initiatives. For examples of each type, see the full Pew Research analysis.

6. In Europe, Muslims and Christians faced harassment by government officials or policies in the largest share of countries in 2011 (49% and 36% respectively), while Jews and Muslims faced harassment by individuals or groups in society in the largest share of countries (69% and 64% respectively).

For instance, the European Court of Human Rights recently found that British law does not adequately protect an employee’s right to display religious symbols in the workplace – such as wearing a cross. In France, a Rabbi and several Jewish school children were gunned down in a brazen act of terror. In Russia, the Mayor of Moscow has limited the number of mosques to four despite a growing Muslim population, which numbers more than 1 million due to migration. This means – per mosque – hundreds of thousands of people would have to squeeze into spaces meant only for hundreds.

Finally, although it is much more common for Jews to be harassed by individuals and groups in society, there has been a fivefold increase in the number of countries where government harassment occurred. Government harassment of Jews occurred in 22% of European countries in 2011, up from 4% in 2007.

For a discussion of global social hostilities involving religion and government restrictions on religion with Europe's place in relation to other regions, see my TEDx Talk.

As the possibility of U.S. military intervention in Syria mounts in response to the alleged use of chemical weapons by the regime of Basheer Assad, Pope Francis calls for prayer and fasting for peace. Pope Francis encouraged people to gather on Sept. 7 from 7 PM until midnight in St Peter’s Square, and also invited non-Catholics to participate in ways they feel are appropriate, according to Vatican Radio.

Last week, U.S. President Barack Obama laid out the case for limited military action against Syrian regime targets as a result of their alleged use of chemical weapons that killed over one thousand people - including hundreds of children. Syrian authorities deny their involvement and, in a BBC interview, said that any US military action against Syria would amount to "support for al-Qaeda and its affiliates."

As the tensions continue to mount in the two-year civil war that began during the 2011 Arab Spring uprisings, here are three things to know about religion and religious freedom in Syria from recent Pew Research studies.

1. Syria is more religiously diverse than you might think

Shia Muslims account for 15-20% of Muslims

Syria's 2010 population was slightly more than 20 million, with Muslims accounting for 93% (19 million), Christians 5% (1 million) and the religiously unaffiliated 2% (.4 million), according to Pew Research estimates.

While Syria's population is largely Muslim, Sunni and Shia Muslim communities contribute to its diversity. By comparison, Egypt is less diverse because its Muslim population is almost entirely Sunni, while Christians make up a similar share according to Pew Research estimates. (See more about Egypt.)

Sunni Muslims in Syria number between 15-16 million, while Shia Muslims, mostly belonging to the Alawite sect, number between 3-4 million. Although the Alawites are a numerical minority, they control many of the mechanisms of power within the country. According to the U.S. State Department, for instance, the "Alawi sect, of which President Assad and his family are members, continued to hold an elevated political status disproportionate to its numbers, including in the military and other security services."

Among Christians, approximately 590,000 are Orthodox, 430,000 are Catholic and 40,000 belong to various Protestant denominations. Syria is famous in Christian history for being the location of St. Paul's conversion in Aleppo.

2. The Syrian civil war has increasingly fallen along sectarian lines, threatening Majorities and Minorities alike

A June 2013 Pew Research report noted that the ongoing civil war in Syria, which began as a protest against the regime of President Assad, now falls largely along sectarian lines. There are also some indications that the sectarian dimensions of the conflict have spilled across borders. For instance, Hezbollah - a Shia Muslim group designated as a terrorist organization by several governments - reportedly crossed into Syria from Lebanon to join the ongoing civil war on the side of the regime led by President Assad. The coalition of rebel forces seeking to topple the regime, however, is largely Sunni Muslim.

Smaller religious minorities are also caught up in the Syrian conflict. For instance, in April two Orthodox Christian bishops were kidnapped by gunmen in Aleppo, Syria. They are still being held. And, as noted by the Wall Street Journal, ancient Catholic and Orthodox communities are finding themselves on the wrong side of an increasingly sectarian conflict, threatening their very survival. Indeed, reports indicate that the uncertain future of Syrian Christians is one shared by many historic Christian communities across the Middle East.

3. Syria has among the world's highest government restrictions on religion

Syria has among the highest levels of government restrictions on religion, ranking 9th most restrictive worldwide, according to the most recent Pew Research report. Government restrictions in Syria included active use of force against religious groups; very high favoritism of Shia Islam above others; prohibitions on Muslims converting from Islam to other religions; and restrictions on religious literature or broadcasting.

In particular, the Syrian "government increased its targeting and surveillance of members of faith groups it deemed a threat, including members of the country’s Sunni majority," according to the U.S.State Department.

For a discussion on the association between social hostilities and government restrictions, see my TEDx Talk.